UPDATE on Wash Post's homophobic race-baiting magazine

Sorry gang, I just got back and saw that the PDFs of the magazine (mentioned in the post below) were a bit large to download. We have a few solutions:

1. Download a 1.2 meg file of the entire 16 page magazine here. This server is much quicker, and you can download the entire magazine at one (albeit a blurrier version):
http://rawstory.com/images/pdf/BothSidesSmall.pdf

2. Download the individual pages here, still as pdf (I need jpgs of these if anyone can help). These are from a FASTER server, so should be much easier to download.
http://www.frankenhooker.com/images/arsenal/posthate/bothsidesmag1.pdf
http://www.frankenhooker.com/images/arsenal/posthate/bothsidesmag2.pdf
http://www.frankenhooker.com/images/arsenal/posthate/bothsidesmag3.pdf
http://www.frankenhooker.com/images/arsenal/posthate/bothsidesmag4.pdf

If those links are slow, try these as well:
http://dugard.org/~dave/bothsides/bothsidesmag1.pdf
http://dugard.org/~dave/bothsides/bothsidesmag2.pdf
http://dugard.org/~dave/bothsides/bothsidesmag3.pdf
http://dugard.org/~dave/bothsides/bothsidesmag4.pdf

3. I think we need to make this a major story, and political effort. One visitor had already mentioned about talking to his media buyer's and asking them to weigh in with the Post. Does anyone have any other ideas for how to blow this up bigger?

4. Finally, someone in the comments mentioned the "freedom of speech" issue - namely, aren't these bozos able to say whatever they want even if we don't like it. It's a valid concern, and I have a valid response:

A word about Freedom of Speech

I have two words for those who might suggest that the Post and this anti-gay group have the right to "freedom of speech": David Duke.

I doubt the Washington Post practices unfettered freedom of speech in its advertising supplements. I refuse to believe that David Duke could run a similar Wash Post supplement about African-Americans, presenting evidence that blacks are physically and mentally inferior to whites, that their struggle was nothing like the struggle of, say, Jews who were killed during the Holocaust, and that therefore blacks don't deserve the same civil rights you and I deserve, and that blacks can change and become white by simply using skin cream, so they're not a "real" minority. Think the Post would run that? Of course not.

What we have here is a double standard in the "freedom of speech" the Washington Post offers those who would attack minorities. Attack a gay, a-okay. Attack other minorities, not so okay. If the Post is going to have standards about what bigotry and quack science it will and won't publish in its advertising supplements, then it should apply those standards equally to all. And I doubt David Duke would get a real friendly welcome from the Post.